January 18, 2013

Plastics Suck Up Other Toxins: Double Whammy for Marine Life, Gross for Seafood



Photo courtesy of Kent K. Barnes / kentkb

Some plastics are worse than others for the marine life that accidentally or intentionally eat them. That’s because not only are the plastics themselves toxic but some also act as sponges for other toxins. Unfortunately the most commonly produced plastics also absorb the most chemicals. This according to a new study in early view in Environmental Science & Technology. 

“It surprised us that even after a year some plastics would continue to take up contaminants.”

The researchers measured the absorption of persistent organic pollutants (POPs)—specifically polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) and polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs)—to the five most common types of mass-produced plastics:

  • Polyethylene terephthalate (PET). Recycling symbol #1. Example: Water bottles.
  • High-density polyethylene (HDPE). Recycling symbol #2. Example: Detergent bottles. 
  • Polyvinyl chloride (PVC). Recycling symbol #3. Example: Clear food packaging. 
  • Low-density polyethylene (LDPE). Recycling symbol #4. Example: Plastic shopping bags. 
  • Polypropylene (PP). Recycling symbol #5. Example: Yogurt containers, bottle caps.

From this research it seems that stuff made from polyethylene and polypropylene likely poses a greater risk to marine animals (and presumably the people that eat them) than products made from PET and PVC. Though the authors note that PVC is carcinogenic and toxic all by itself.

Laysan albatross carcass filled with ingested plastic debris, Midway Island. Nearly all carcasses found here have marine debris in them. It’s estimated that albatross feed their chicks ~10,000 lbs of marine debris annually on Midway. Andy Collins, NOAA Office of National Marine Sanctuaries

The authors were also surprised to find how long the plastics kept absorbing the contaminants. At one site they estimated it would take 44 months for high-density polyethylene to stop absorbing POPs.

“As the plastic continues to degrade, it’s potentially getting more and more hazardous to organisms as they absorb more and more contaminants,” says lead author Chelsea Rochman (UC Davis). 

The research was conducted over a year at five sites in San Diego Bay with pellets of each type of plastic immersed in seawater and retrieved periodically for absorption measurements. 

The paper:

  • Chelsea M. Rochman, Eunha Hoh, Brian T. Hentschel, and Shawn Kaye. Long-Term Field Measurement of Sorption of Organic Contaminants to Five Types of Plastic Pellets: Implications for Plastic Marine Debris. Environmental Science & Technology (2013). 
 

WE CAME UP SHORT.

We just wrapped up a shorter-than-normal, urgent-as-ever fundraising drive and we came up about $45,000 short of our $300,000 goal.

That means we're going to have upwards of $350,000, maybe more, to raise in online donations between now and June 30, when our fiscal year ends and we have to get to break-even. And even though there's zero cushion to miss the mark, we won't be all that in your face about our fundraising again until June.

So we urgently need this specific ask, what you're reading right now, to start bringing in more donations than it ever has. The reality, for these next few months and next few years, is that we have to start finding ways to grow our online supporter base in a big way—and we're optimistic we can keep making real headway by being real with you about this.

Because the bottom line: Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism Mother Jones exists to do. The only investors who won’t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its future—you.

And we hope you might consider pitching in before moving on to whatever it is you're about to do next. We really need to see if we'll be able to raise more with this real estate on a daily basis than we have been, so we're hoping to see a promising start.

payment methods

WE CAME UP SHORT.

We just wrapped up a shorter-than-normal, urgent-as-ever fundraising drive and we came up about $45,000 short of our $300,000 goal.

That means we're going to have upwards of $350,000, maybe more, to raise in online donations between now and June 30, when our fiscal year ends and we have to get to break-even. And even though there's zero cushion to miss the mark, we won't be all that in your face about our fundraising again until June.

So we urgently need this specific ask, what you're reading right now, to start bringing in more donations than it ever has. The reality, for these next few months and next few years, is that we have to start finding ways to grow our online supporter base in a big way—and we're optimistic we can keep making real headway by being real with you about this.

Because the bottom line: Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism Mother Jones exists to do. The only investors who won’t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its future—you.

And we hope you might consider pitching in before moving on to whatever it is you're about to do next. We really need to see if we'll be able to raise more with this real estate on a daily basis than we have been, so we're hoping to see a promising start.

payment methods

We Recommend

Latest

Sign up for our free newsletter

Subscribe to the Mother Jones Daily to have our top stories delivered directly to your inbox.

Get our award-winning magazine

Save big on a full year of investigations, ideas, and insights.

Subscribe

Support our journalism

Help Mother Jones' reporters dig deep with a tax-deductible donation.

Donate